***OFFICIAL GUN CONTROL DEBATE*** (2 Viewers)

[smotherhook]

One thing I do fear as a gun owner, is that once you take away AR the next move will be to take away shotguns, rifles, handguns, etc.If I fear it, and I support an AR ban, just imagine what NRA and other diehards think.

a disarmed country has no defense against the tyranny of govt.

How many tyrants have we overthrown with our guns since the time of bill of rights?

We've never had any tyrants because of our 2nd amendment right.

nor have we ever been invaded via ground forces for the exact same reason.

 

[Joe T]

a disarmed country has no defense against the tyranny of govt.

As NRA publications always point out, the first thing that Stalin, Hitler, and Mao did when taking power is seizing everyone's guns.Which would be a great point if it weren't for the fact that it's a complete lie- never happened.

How many NRA publications have you read?

 

[General Malaise]

I think I actually do remember some sort of gun safety lecture in school. Like, "if you're at a friend's house and you see a gun, don't touch it." Or are you thinking of something more?

Something like that is a good start.Perhaps demonstrating how dangerous and lethal they really are. Show what happens when a bullet goes through an animal carcass or milk jug or something.

Explain what a safety is and why you never, ever want to point a gun at someone because of what could happen.

Always assume a gun is loaded.

Stuff like that.

Ummm, if you take a bunch of 8-12 year old boys and show them what it looks like to fire a gun into a milk jug, more than a few of them aren't going to be scared away....they are going to want to fire one immediately. "Watch how cool this is!"

"Now, you must NEVER play with one".

That should work.

I was about 8 or 9 when my father took me out in the backyard and demonstrated what his .38 revolver would do. It was so loud, and clearly dangerous enough from that one example that I never wanted to play with guns as a kid. It does work.

My parents didn't own guns. They told me to stay away from them. That worked too.

 

[Uwe Blab]

One thing I do fear as a gun owner, is that once you take away AR the next move will be to take away shotguns, rifles, handguns, etc.If I fear it, and I support an AR ban, just imagine what NRA and other diehards think.

a disarmed country has no defense against the tyranny of govt.

How many tyrants have we overthrown with our guns since the time of bill of rights?

We've never had any tyrants because of our 2nd amendment right.

nor have we ever been invaded via ground forces for the exact same reason.

I'm thinking those two big oceans might have something to do with it. And that our friends to the north are quite mellow.

 

[Joe T]

see iraq, nazi germany, russia,...........look at your history book giggle box

Yes, I do see. More falsehoods. In not one of these cases were guns seized (well, that's not entirely correct. In the case of Iraq and Nazi Germany, American occupiers seized all weapons from the local inhabitants.)

This isn't entirely correct either.

 

[Joe T]

see iraq, nazi germany, russia,...........look at your history book giggle box

Yes, I do see. More falsehoods. In not one of these cases were guns seized (well, that's not entirely correct. In the case of Iraq and Nazi Germany, American occupiers seized all weapons from the local inhabitants.)

This isn't entirely correct either.

"Jews were forbidden from the manufacturing or ownership of firearms and ammunition."

 

[timschochet]

nor have we ever been invaded via ground forces for the exact same reason.

Now this starts to get really ridiculous. Actually, you're wrong again: not counting the Revolutionary War, the United States has been invaded 4 times in our history- once by England in 1812, once by Mexico, and twice by the Confederate States of America. I wonder if in any of those cases the invaders paused, at least for the moment, to consider what the impact of the 2nd Amendment would be on their invasion.

 

[General Malaise]

I think I actually do remember some sort of gun safety lecture in school. Like, "if you're at a friend's house and you see a gun, don't touch it." Or are you thinking of something more?

Something like that is a good start.Perhaps demonstrating how dangerous and lethal they really are. Show what happens when a bullet goes through an animal carcass or milk jug or something.

Explain what a safety is and why you never, ever want to point a gun at someone because of what could happen.

Always assume a gun is loaded.

Stuff like that.

Ummm, if you take a bunch of 8-12 year old boys and show them what it looks like to fire a gun into a milk jug, more than a few of them aren't going to be scared away....they are going to want to fire one immediately. "Watch how cool this is!"

"Now, you must NEVER play with one".

That should work.

Well, I haven't fully developed the curriculum yet, Chief.

Oh, I think it has merit, I guess. I can remember a fireman coming to our school and lighting some gas on fire. I avoided that until I was in boy scouts and we lit everything we could find on fire on camping trips. I'm just saying that your message might work for some, but it's going to come across as really cool to others. Adolescence and booze strip away even the most common of common sense among boys.

 

[wikkidpissah]

Instead of debating, i think i'll just post this every dozen or so pgs til it reaches 1000, then give up. That will make me feel i've done my part. I sure hope y'all can get together and figure out precisely how the deck chairs should be aligned on this sinking ship.

A couple of weeks ago, i was about the only killing-machine (handguns & automatics - weapons designed to most furtively & effectively send missiles through human flesh - i dont care if single-shot weapons are ISSUED to each American household in exchange) abolitionist on this board and experience has taught me that i'll likely be the only one again in about a month's time.

It has nothing to do with the guns, actually, it has to do with our national mental health. As civilizations mechanize and populations expand, it becomes ever more difficult to feel personally powerful. The average person's comfort zone shrinks with the loss of each generally-followed rule and further nebulization of what few limits remain.

Control. Where do we find control? Gossip & reality shows that so easily convince us how much better we are than others? Groups with very distinct borders (Packerbackers, Goths, Reps & Dems, Twice-borns) where people who dont think "our" way are excluded and which hold regular celebrations of shared commonness? Passing the pain in the public flow of events to gain small personal revenges.

Or what about this? Down the street, I can lay a few Benjis on a counter and get a machine that, if i wanted to, could mow down everything in my sight. I'd never do it, of course, but I could have ABSOLUTE control in such a moment and even thinking about it squares my world a lil bit, maybe enough. Look at it - those cold, clean, gleaming lines fairly scream "answer". Lift it - out of the case, its surprising weight evokes power and promises that, loaded, it's almost too heavy for anything but immediate and perfect......justice. Y'know? If i had one in my home, i'd feel just enough control to get through my days.

That's why Glocks exist. The inexplicable availability of assault weapons are just an extension, as video games continue to prove, of how high-tolerance is fantasization.

That's why both need to go - when people who lose their tenuous hold on self-control have, right there in a shoebox on a shelf, a way to regain it REAL quick, #### happens. nufced

I agree with this. I just don't feel the right solution is to have the government limit everyone's ability to own a gun. It's to help the real underlying problem. We need to make it possible/preferable for most people to stay in the communities that they were raised in so there's at least a little more normalcy and support for people with these problems. But this ties back into larger economic arguments and would likely mean having to reduce our standard of living so it's not going to happen. Given that, I'll deal with these occasional tragedies rather than punish the entire population.

Semi-hijack, but youre dead-bang on here. Having been a part of the generation where, after 10000 yrs of civilization, all of a great nation became able, for the first time, to each chart their own course, i cannot in good conscience begrudge my fellow citizens - especially those in their 1st 50 yrs of freedom as a race or gender - their era of celebration as individuals. Nonetheless, our coming collapse - resulting from the fact that even America cant hold up under the weight of 300,000,000 separate constituencies - will necessarily bring us back to being a great string of the kind of small communities - the truest home for the human heart - you address.

 

[ericttspikes]

One thing I do fear as a gun owner, is that once you take away AR the next move will be to take away shotguns, rifles, handguns, etc.If I fear it, and I support an AR ban, just imagine what NRA and other diehards think.

a disarmed country has no defense against the tyranny of govt.

This is a paranoid fantasy. IF the government wanted to take over, a bunch of dudes with guns who read Soldier of Fortune aren't going to stop a damn thing. Our government has more fire power than most nations combined. What are guns going to do against a chemical strike, tactical nuke, heavy artillery, tanks, air strikes?

 

[Joe T]

"Under both the 1928 and 1938 acts, gun manufacturers and dealers were required to maintain records with information about who purchased guns and the guns' serial numbers. These records were to be delivered to a police authority for inspection at the end of each year.

On November 11, 1938, the Minister of the Interior, Wilhelm Frick, passed Regulations Against Jews' Possession of Weapons. This regulation effectively deprived all Jews of the right to possess firearms or other weapons.[7]"

 

[smotherhook]

One thing I do fear as a gun owner, is that once you take away AR the next move will be to take away shotguns, rifles, handguns, etc.If I fear it, and I support an AR ban, just imagine what NRA and other diehards think.

a disarmed country has no defense against the tyranny of govt.

How many tyrants have we overthrown with our guns since the time of bill of rights?

We've never had any tyrants because of our 2nd amendment right.

nor have we ever been invaded via ground forces for the exact same reason.

I'm thinking those two big oceans might have something to do with it. And that our friends to the north are quite mellow.

really? the oceans have stopped our enemies from invading us? hey, i stand corrected!

 

[General Malaise]

see iraq, nazi germany, russia,...........look at your history book giggle box

Yes, I do see. More falsehoods. In not one of these cases were guns seized (well, that's not entirely correct. In the case of Iraq and Nazi Germany, American occupiers seized all weapons from the local inhabitants.)

This isn't entirely correct either.

"Jews were forbidden from the manufacturing or ownership of firearms and ammunition."

You think this would have prevented the Holocaust?

 

[jafo]

see iraq, nazi germany, russia,...........look at your history book giggle box

Yes, I do see. More falsehoods. In not one of these cases were guns seized (well, that's not entirely correct. In the case of Iraq and Nazi Germany, American occupiers seized all weapons from the local inhabitants.)

"As Hitler became chancellor on January 30, 1933, Nazi party police did indeed start seizing guns from all those deemed enemies of the state. That included communists, socialists and Jews."

 

[timschochet]

a disarmed country has no defense against the tyranny of govt.

As NRA publications always point out, the first thing that Stalin, Hitler, and Mao did when taking power is seizing everyone's guns.Which would be a great point if it weren't for the fact that it's a complete lie- never happened.

How many NRA publications have you read?

I used to read their main magazine all the time. My roommate subscribed. There was always this full page ad, with Hitler, Stalin, Mao, and I think Khomeini, with the message "THE FIRST THING THEY DID WAS TAKE AWAY PEOPLE'S GUNS!!!!" Just complete BS.

 

[Apple Jack]

One thing I do fear as a gun owner, is that once you take away AR the next move will be to take away shotguns, rifles, handguns, etc.If I fear it, and I support an AR ban, just imagine what NRA and other diehards think.

a disarmed country has no defense against the tyranny of govt.

How many tyrants have we overthrown with our guns since the time of bill of rights?

We've never had any tyrants because of our 2nd amendment right.

nor have we ever been invaded via ground forces for the exact same reason.

You're not helping your team here fellas.

 

[Mello]

One thing I do fear as a gun owner, is that once you take away AR the next move will be to take away shotguns, rifles, handguns, etc.If I fear it, and I support an AR ban, just imagine what NRA and other diehards think.

a disarmed country has no defense against the tyranny of govt.

How many tyrants have we overthrown with our guns since the time of bill of rights?

We've never had any tyrants because of our 2nd amendment right.

nor have we ever been invaded via ground forces for the exact same reason.

You have to really cherry pick some criteria for that to be true. The British, Japanese, Confederacy, and Indian tribes have invaded US territory. Also the Mexicans with Texas before they were a state, but I don't think the 2nd Amendment scared them away.

 

[Joe T]

see iraq, nazi germany, russia,...........look at your history book giggle box

Yes, I do see. More falsehoods. In not one of these cases were guns seized (well, that's not entirely correct. In the case of Iraq and Nazi Germany, American occupiers seized all weapons from the local inhabitants.)

This isn't entirely correct either.

"Jews were forbidden from the manufacturing or ownership of firearms and ammunition."

You think this would have prevented the Holocaust?

Pretty sure I never said that. Never implied it either.

 

[culdeus]

I like guns. I own guns. 10 days ago I would have never said this. I think it's time to shut down Carbine sales. Sorry.

 

[BassNBrew]

Seems obvious that most of the loudest voices in this thread have little or even zero practical knowledge of guns. I find that hilarious

Seems to me that's the case with lots of things. The prohibition of drugs is championed by people that have never tried them. The prohibition of online gambling is backed by people that have probably never made a wager in their life. I don't think there is anything "hilarious" at all about this discussion or the roots of why it's being discussed. Kids are dead because a man with mental instability had access to the type of gun I don't think you can make a cogent argument for owning using bullets I seriously doubt you can justify for private use. Those of us who are loudly asking for change don't need to have practical knowledge of these types of guns to speak out against them. Glad you find that funny. I don't think any of this is funny at all.

Just wanted to point out IMO the people who haven't tried online gambling and drugs and want their prohibition are on the wrong side of the argument. Click a mouse, lose your house.

 

[jafo]

One thing I do fear as a gun owner, is that once you take away AR the next move will be to take away shotguns, rifles, handguns, etc.If I fear it, and I support an AR ban, just imagine what NRA and other diehards think.

a disarmed country has no defense against the tyranny of govt.

This is a paranoid fantasy. IF the government wanted to take over, a bunch of dudes with guns who read Soldier of Fortune aren't going to stop a damn thing. Our government has more fire power than most nations combined. What are guns going to do against a chemical strike, tactical nuke, heavy artillery, tanks, air strikes?

"It's an historical fact that insurgent movements comprised of lightly armed troops can inflict defeats on organized militaries. Their victories do not come from set piece battles against the superior force, but wearing down the will of the enemy over extended time periods.This is known as asymmetrical warfare."

 

[Joe T]

a disarmed country has no defense against the tyranny of govt.

As NRA publications always point out, the first thing that Stalin, Hitler, and Mao did when taking power is seizing everyone's guns.Which would be a great point if it weren't for the fact that it's a complete lie- never happened.

How many NRA publications have you read?

I used to read their main magazine all the time. My roommate subscribed. There was always this full page ad, with Hitler, Stalin, Mao, and I think Khomeini, with the message "THE FIRST THING THEY DID WAS TAKE AWAY PEOPLE'S GUNS!!!!" Just complete BS.

Well, they did take away the Jews guns so it's not "just complete BS."Note: It gets old correcting you all the time.

 

[Schlzm]

nor have we ever been invaded via ground forces for the exact same reason.

Now this starts to get really ridiculous. Actually, you're wrong again: not counting the Revolutionary War, the United States has been invaded 4 times in our history- once by England in 1812, once by Mexico, and twice by the Confederate States of America. I wonder if in any of those cases the invaders paused, at least for the moment, to consider what the impact of the 2nd Amendment would be on their invasion.

I'm sure a few of them paused at <because of> the impact when those farmers and merchants returned fire . Schlzm

 

[Apple Jack]

One thing I do fear as a gun owner, is that once you take away AR the next move will be to take away shotguns, rifles, handguns, etc.If I fear it, and I support an AR ban, just imagine what NRA and other diehards think.

a disarmed country has no defense against the tyranny of govt.

How many tyrants have we overthrown with our guns since the time of bill of rights?

We've never had any tyrants because of our 2nd amendment right.

nor have we ever been invaded via ground forces for the exact same reason.

I'm thinking those two big oceans might have something to do with it. And that our friends to the north are quite mellow.

really? the oceans have stopped our enemies from invading us? hey, i stand corrected!

Assume no civilians had guns. Exactly how would a ground invasion happen, Eisenhower?

 

[smotherhook]

nor have we ever been invaded via ground forces for the exact same reason.

Now this starts to get really ridiculous. Actually, you're wrong again: not counting the Revolutionary War, the United States has been invaded 4 times in our history- once by England in 1812, once by Mexico, and twice by the Confederate States of America. I wonder if in any of those cases the invaders paused, at least for the moment, to consider what the impact of the 2nd Amendment would be on their invasion.

can we argue in the 20th century?

 

[timschochet]

see iraq, nazi germany, russia,...........look at your history book giggle box

Yes, I do see. More falsehoods. In not one of these cases were guns seized (well, that's not entirely correct. In the case of Iraq and Nazi Germany, American occupiers seized all weapons from the local inhabitants.)

"As Hitler became chancellor on January 30, 1933, Nazi party police did indeed start seizing guns from all those deemed enemies of the state. That included communists, socialists and Jews."

I'd sure like to know where your quote is from. Very few Jews had guns. In fact, outside of rural areas, very few Germans had any guns to speak of. That is, they had very few until the Nazis started arming them. The truth is almost the exact opposite of the propaganda.

 

[Uwe Blab]

nor have we ever been invaded via ground forces for the exact same reason.

Now this starts to get really ridiculous. Actually, you're wrong again: not counting the Revolutionary War, the United States has been invaded 4 times in our history- once by England in 1812, once by Mexico, and twice by the Confederate States of America. I wonder if in any of those cases the invaders paused, at least for the moment, to consider what the impact of the 2nd Amendment would be on their invasion.

can we argue in the 20th century?

You're really sticking with this? REALLY?

 

[jafo]

see iraq, nazi germany, russia,...........look at your history book giggle box

Yes, I do see. More falsehoods. In not one of these cases were guns seized (well, that's not entirely correct. In the case of Iraq and Nazi Germany, American occupiers seized all weapons from the local inhabitants.)

"As Hitler became chancellor on January 30, 1933, Nazi party police did indeed start seizing guns from all those deemed enemies of the state. That included communists, socialists and Jews."

I'd sure like to know where your quote is from. Very few Jews had guns. In fact, outside of rural areas, very few Germans had any guns to speak of. That is, they had very few until the Nazis started arming them. The truth is almost the exact opposite of the propaganda.

Daily Kos

 

[timschochet]

a disarmed country has no defense against the tyranny of govt.

As NRA publications always point out, the first thing that Stalin, Hitler, and Mao did when taking power is seizing everyone's guns.Which would be a great point if it weren't for the fact that it's a complete lie- never happened.

How many NRA publications have you read?

I used to read their main magazine all the time. My roommate subscribed. There was always this full page ad, with Hitler, Stalin, Mao, and I think Khomeini, with the message "THE FIRST THING THEY DID WAS TAKE AWAY PEOPLE'S GUNS!!!!" Just complete BS.

Well, they did take away the Jews guns so it's not "just complete BS."Note: It gets old correcting you all the time.

What Jews guns? The Jews of Germany, Poland and Eastern Europe (the victims of the Holocaust) were 99.9999% unarmed prior to 1939.

 

[smotherhook]

okay, i am out guys. i dont know what the answer is to this debate. I surely wish someone armed with half a sack could have been there and potentially saved those children.

 

[General Malaise]

okay, i am out guys. i dont know what the answer is to this debate. I surely wish someone armed with half a sack could have been there and potentially saved those children.

His mom not having an assault rifle with hollow point bullets might have saved a few. Not all, but maybe a few.

 

[Apple Jack]

One thing I do fear as a gun owner, is that once you take away AR the next move will be to take away shotguns, rifles, handguns, etc.If I fear it, and I support an AR ban, just imagine what NRA and other diehards think.

a disarmed country has no defense against the tyranny of govt.

This is a paranoid fantasy. IF the government wanted to take over, a bunch of dudes with guns who read Soldier of Fortune aren't going to stop a damn thing. Our government has more fire power than most nations combined. What are guns going to do against a chemical strike, tactical nuke, heavy artillery, tanks, air strikes?

"It's an historical fact that insurgent movements comprised of lightly armed troops can inflict defeats on organized militaries. Their victories do not come from set piece battles against the superior force, but wearing down the will of the enemy over extended time periods.This is known as asymmetrical warfare."

Sounds like something from a 1891 Funk & Wagnalls.

 

[ericttspikes]

One thing I do fear as a gun owner, is that once you take away AR the next move will be to take away shotguns, rifles, handguns, etc.If I fear it, and I support an AR ban, just imagine what NRA and other diehards think.

a disarmed country has no defense against the tyranny of govt.

see iraq, nazi germany, russia,...........look at your history book giggle box

The Japanese people don't seem worried about it, and they have virtually eliminated gun deaths. The truth is, countries awash with guns must put up with massive amounts of gun deaths. No use pretending to be shocked or outraged about events like Sandy Hook. That is just collateral damage of "our freedom" I guess. As Japan has proven, there is an answer.

 

[Apple Jack]

nor have we ever been invaded via ground forces for the exact same reason.

Now this starts to get really ridiculous. Actually, you're wrong again: not counting the Revolutionary War, the United States has been invaded 4 times in our history- once by England in 1812, once by Mexico, and twice by the Confederate States of America. I wonder if in any of those cases the invaders paused, at least for the moment, to consider what the impact of the 2nd Amendment would be on their invasion.

can we argue in the 20th century?

You're really sticking with this? REALLY?

An epic under-the-wire entry for post of the year.

 

[General Malaise]

One thing I do fear as a gun owner, is that once you take away AR the next move will be to take away shotguns, rifles, handguns, etc.If I fear it, and I support an AR ban, just imagine what NRA and other diehards think.

a disarmed country has no defense against the tyranny of govt.

see iraq, nazi germany, russia,...........look at your history book giggle box

The Japanese people don't seem worried about it, and they have virtually eliminated gun deaths. The truth is, countries awash with guns must put up with massive amounts of gun deaths. No use pretending to be shocked or outraged about events like Sandy Hook. That is just collateral damage of "our freedom" I guess. As Japan has proven, there is an answer.

What do they do for home protection?

 

[Andy Dufresne]

His mom not having an assault rifle with hollow point bullets might have saved a few. Not all, but maybe a few.

Let's take this sideways a bit. You're right that it probably wasn't the best idea for her to have these guns.How much responsibility does the mother bear here (even though she's dead)? Her son had shown signs of mental instability. Why did he even have access to these guns?

 

[Maurile Tremblay]

a disarmed country has no defense against the tyranny of govt.

As NRA publications always point out, the first thing that Stalin, Hitler, and Mao did when taking power is seizing everyone's guns.Which would be a great point if it weren't for the fact that it's a complete lie- never happened.

How many NRA publications have you read?

I used to read their main magazine all the time. My roommate subscribed. There was always this full page ad, with Hitler, Stalin, Mao, and I think Khomeini, with the message "THE FIRST THING THEY DID WAS TAKE AWAY PEOPLE'S GUNS!!!!" Just complete BS.

As the New York Times always points out, Sears is having an amazing deal on refrigerators!

 

[Schlzm]

One thing I do fear as a gun owner, is that once you take away AR the next move will be to take away shotguns, rifles, handguns, etc.If I fear it, and I support an AR ban, just imagine what NRA and other diehards think.

a disarmed country has no defense against the tyranny of govt.

see iraq, nazi germany, russia,...........look at your history book giggle box

The Japanese people don't seem worried about it, and they have virtually eliminated gun deaths. The truth is, countries awash with guns must put up with massive amounts of gun deaths. No use pretending to be shocked or outraged about events like Sandy Hook. That is just collateral damage of "our freedom" I guess. As Japan has proven, there is an answer.

I'd rather not get double nuked and disarmed by a foreign power to eliminate firearms from our society, but I guess I am one of those crazy fringe wingers.Schlzm

 

[Jobber]

One thing I do fear as a gun owner, is that once you take away AR the next move will be to take away shotguns, rifles, handguns, etc.If I fear it, and I support an AR ban, just imagine what NRA and other diehards think.

a disarmed country has no defense against the tyranny of govt.

see iraq, nazi germany, russia,...........look at your history book giggle box

The Japanese people don't seem worried about it, and they have virtually eliminated gun deaths. The truth is, countries awash with guns must put up with massive amounts of gun deaths. No use pretending to be shocked or outraged about events like Sandy Hook. That is just collateral damage of "our freedom" I guess. As Japan has proven, there is an answer.

What do they do for home protection?

BO STAFF DUH!

 

[culdeus]

His mom not having an assault rifle with hollow point bullets might have saved a few. Not all, but maybe a few.

Let's take this sideways a bit. You're right that it probably wasn't the best idea for her to have these guns.How much responsibility does the mother bear here (even though she's dead)? Her son had shown signs of mental instability. Why did he even have access to these guns?

This seems to be the pink elephant in this whole thing.

 

[Andy Dufresne]

The Japanese people don't seem worried about it, and they have virtually eliminated gun deaths. The truth is, countries awash with guns must put up with massive amounts of gun deaths. No use pretending to be shocked or outraged about events like Sandy Hook. That is just collateral damage of "our freedom" I guess. As Japan has proven, there is an answer.

What do they do for home protection?

Pikachu I choose YOU!!

 

[ericttspikes]

One thing I do fear as a gun owner, is that once you take away AR the next move will be to take away shotguns, rifles, handguns, etc.

If I fear it, and I support an AR ban, just imagine what NRA and other diehards think.

a disarmed country has no defense against the tyranny of govt.

see iraq, nazi germany, russia,...........look at your history book giggle box

The Japanese people don't seem worried about it, and they have virtually eliminated gun deaths. The truth is, countries awash with guns must put up with massive amounts of gun deaths. No use pretending to be shocked or outraged about events like Sandy Hook. That is just collateral damage of "our freedom" I guess. As Japan has proven, there is an answer.

What do they do for home protection?

According to this, robots and ninjas. That seems cooler than guns to me. I like this part "The only people I personally know who have these are American folks living in Japan."

 

[Apple Jack]

One thing I do fear as a gun owner, is that once you take away AR the next move will be to take away shotguns, rifles, handguns, etc.

If I fear it, and I support an AR ban, just imagine what NRA and other diehards think.

a disarmed country has no defense against the tyranny of govt.

see iraq, nazi germany, russia,...........look at your history book giggle box

The Japanese people don't seem worried about it, and they have virtually eliminated gun deaths. The truth is, countries awash with guns must put up with massive amounts of gun deaths. No use pretending to be shocked or outraged about events like Sandy Hook. That is just collateral damage of "our freedom" I guess. As Japan has proven, there is an answer.

What do they do for home protection?

According to this, robots and ninjas. That seems cooler than guns to me. I like this part "The only people I personally know who have these are American folks living in Japan."

Plus, there's always the threat that you might be walking in on a buk session.

 

[IvanKaramazov]

The Japanese people don't seem worried about it, and they have virtually eliminated gun deaths. The truth is, countries awash with guns must put up with massive amounts of gun deaths. No use pretending to be shocked or outraged about events like Sandy Hook. That is just collateral damage of "our freedom" I guess. As Japan has proven, there is an answer.

What do they do for home protection?

Guns are useless against Godzilla, so there's really no point in them owning any.

 

[urbanhack]

2 week old sushi

 

[rascal]

For one, I would change the law about background checks.

I would expand it to go beyond gun stores (which only account for an estimated 40% of gun sales).

If a private individual wants to sell a gun (gun show or whatever) a back ground check must be performed. They can sell their gun, but the person buying it has to go through a background check or the person selling becomes liable. I'm not sure about the $$ required, but I don't care. Role it into the cost of selling/buying the gun but it should be done.

I would also include a mental health check as part of that background.

That's what I think should be done.

1) Ban AR.

2) Expand background checks to include private sales and mental health.

 

[jafo]

If it hasn't been pointed out already, the shooting at Columbine in 1999 happened during the last Assault Weapons ban (94-04). What makes people think another ban is going to fix the problem?

 

[General Malaise]

His mom not having an assault rifle with hollow point bullets might have saved a few. Not all, but maybe a few.

Let's take this sideways a bit. You're right that it probably wasn't the best idea for her to have these guns.How much responsibility does the mother bear here (even though she's dead)? Her son had shown signs of mental instability. Why did he even have access to these guns?

I don't know why he had access to guns. I cannot answer that. Even if his mother did not own the assault rifle, the hollow point bullets and the other guns, this kid would probably have found a way to obtain them as the reports I'm reading indicate that he was bright and resourceful. So I get the pro-gun argument that if you put tighter restrictions in place, it won't necessarily end tragic events like we saw last week (in both Oregon and CT). There's a lot of questions that we should strive to find answers for because I don't think we should just continue along the same path. There's some major problems in our country when mentally ill people walk into a school or a movie theater or a mall and murder innocent people they don't know. We need to examine every angle and explore every possible option to find a way to curtail, halt and put an end to these senseless atrocities. I don't think gun enthusiasts should pick now as the time to draw their line in the sand and say emphatically "NO, DON'T YOU DARE CHANGE A THING". By the same token, I don't think liberal hippy dippy dreamers like me should use this as their rallying cry for an end to all firearms in this country (though that hasn't stopped me from belting out that tune several times since Friday). Everybody is emotional about this and if you aren't, well then, I don't know what it takes to break down your barriers because listening to the local people of Oregon mourn the loss of Steve Forsythe who was shot last week has hit me hard, but not nearly as hard as clicking through the pictures of the parents who lost their kids. So maybe, once we all calm down a bit and can collect ourselves it would be a good time to really search for some ways to prevent further shootings through compromise, reasonable discourse and mutual understanding.

 

[TobiasFunke]

If it hasn't been pointed out already, the shooting at Columbine in 1999 happened during the last Assault Weapons ban (94-04). What makes people think another ban is going to fix the problem?

Schizm, how can you expect me not to give a snarky drive-by answer to posts as dumb as this one? You ask too much.

 

[rascal]

If it hasn't been pointed out already, the shooting at Columbine in 1999 happened during the last Assault Weapons ban (94-04). What makes people think another ban is going to fix the problem?

It may not. As I pointed out earlier, this country has a systemic issue with mental health and the raising of our children. That needs to be fixed. But this should/can be done as well.